What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Mike Bohn next KU AD?

Bull****. He knows as well as we do that KU will struggle to stay in a BCS conference over the course of the next decade. And, frankly, Bohn isn't exactly killing it at CU so hard that other programs are dying to have him as AD. Especially a program that may be having regrets about a certain head coaching choice.

That said, I'm content with Bohn. Not thrilled, but more than content.
 
ITS TROO, ITS TROO!!!!

mike bohn to KU!!!!

AND!!!!

for CU AD?

4db.

yeah! that asshole.
 
If you were Mikey B, would you want to step into the ticket-gate aftermath? The post B12, pre BigMac era? I wouldn't.

After he dealt with Barnett and the rape scandal. Does he want to clean up another mess and leave something that is only going to get better?
 
This thread is nuts. Bohn was persona non grata like 4-6 months ago. What changed? The Pac 12 move was likely more attributable to Bohn's bosses / CU administration than him.

I still hope he leaves. In football and basketball, in the last 5 years, we have likely been the worst BCS school in the nation. No winning seasons at all. Something has got to give. Hawk should go first, then Bohn. Start over.
 
This thread is nuts. Bohn was persona non grata like 4-6 months ago. What changed? The Pac 12 move was likely more attributable to Bohn's bosses / CU administration than him.

I still hope he leaves. In football and basketball, in the last 5 years, we have likely been the worst BCS school in the nation. No winning seasons at all. Something has got to give. Hawk should go first, then Bohn. Start over.

Point one: Bohn was personna non grata - incorrect. The guy has been front and center and hasn't ducked any interview requests or speaking engagements.

Point two: What has he done in the last six months? He's broken ground on a new basketball practice facility, hired two new basketball coaches, and helped orchestrate the move to the Pac 12. It's pretty well known that he wanted to sh*t can Hawkins last year, but his bosses told him he couldn't. So are you going to hold that against him?

Point three: CU has been the worst BCS school for the last five years: Incorrect. Hell, ISU is worse. Baylor is worse. WSU is worse. There are lots of BCS programs that are worse than CU. That's just a ridiculous statement.

Compare where we are today with where we were when Dick Tharp left town with his tail between his legs. Facilities are better. Attendance is better. Revenues are better. In fact, the only thing that's worse is the on field/court performance of the teams themselves. All Bohn can do in that situation is find another coach, which he's shown a willingness to do.

Equating his performance to the performance of the football team is absurd, yet it happens a lot. I'm not sure why.
 
Ok, the fact that we are mucking it up with the dregs of D1 is sad. We should be much higher than Iowa St. And for the record, Baylor was in the Elite Eight this year and Washington State made the Sweet 16 a few years ago under Bennett. What exactly do we have to be proud of here recently? A 6-7 season in '07?

Since when does an AD not take heat for athletic incompetence? Sounds like we've been down so long that some of us now accept mediocrity.

Point one: Bohn was personna non grata - incorrect. The guy has been front and center and hasn't ducked any interview requests or speaking engagements.

Point two: What has he done in the last six months? He's broken ground on a new basketball practice facility, hired two new basketball coaches, and helped orchestrate the move to the Pac 12. It's pretty well known that he wanted to sh*t can Hawkins last year, but his bosses told him he couldn't. So are you going to hold that against him?

Point three: CU has been the worst BCS school for the last five years: Incorrect. Hell, ISU is worse. Baylor is worse. WSU is worse. There are lots of BCS programs that are worse than CU. That's just a ridiculous statement.

Compare where we are today with where we were when Dick Tharp left town with his tail between his legs. Facilities are better. Attendance is better. Revenues are better. In fact, the only thing that's worse is the on field/court performance of the teams themselves. All Bohn can do in that situation is find another coach, which he's shown a willingness to do.

Equating his performance to the performance of the football team is absurd, yet it happens a lot. I'm not sure why.
 
Didn't we just recently get a post on here that the University was going to pony up $12 mil or something to the AD, or was going to increase funding to the AD by 23% or something? For the first time in forever, we've got an AD who is working hard to foster the relationship with the school, we've got the AD, the Chancellor, etc. all working together on projects, we've got an AD who will go on the radio anytime, anywhere to talk about CU athletics, he doesn't say stupid things or do stupid things that make the University look bad. Everything he does is done in the best interest of the University, not Mike Bohn.

Why would you want to ****can the guy who brought that on?

Mike Bohn has certainly missed on a few coaching hires (and it is hard to blame him for Hawkins hire, he was certainly a no-brainer at the time) but aside from that everything he has done for CU has been GOLD.

I think it would be a pretty bad thing for CU if Mike Bohn left for another school - hope it doesn't happen.
 
Football is the straw that stirs the drink at CU.

Many fans will discount or even ignore everything else a CU AD is doing if the CU football team is losing.

Success in other sports or with other initiatives for the AD is looked at as nice, but in the same light as people look at Hawkins' team setting GPA records while avoiding NCAA sanctions.

I do acknowledge that football is king and that success in football is essential for a healthy AD at CU. But I disagree with the single-mindedness many CU fans have on this issue. I actually think it's a problem and had resulted in the complete degradation of things like fundraising, academic support, facilities for other programs, and financial maximization of other programs. Bohn has had a ridiculous amount of stuff to fix since he took over outside of the fallout from the football scandal.
 
Ok, the fact that we are mucking it up with the dregs of D1 is sad. We should be much higher than Iowa St. And for the record, Baylor was in the Elite Eight this year and Washington State made the Sweet 16 a few years ago under Bennett. What exactly do we have to be proud of here recently? A 6-7 season in '07?

Since when does an AD not take heat for athletic incompetence? Sounds like we've been down so long that some of us now accept mediocrity.

I do not accept mediocrity from the coaches. Hawkins sucks as a coach and should be fired. Bohn, from most accounts, wanted to do just that. Would you like Mike Bohn to start coaching the football team? I don't think you understand what an AD's job entails. It's a lot more than hiring and firing coaches.
We've not gotten mediocrity from Mike Bohn. As I've said (ad naseum), the guy has worked miracles at an athletic department that was stuck in the 1950's. He still has a lot of work to do, but to discount his accomplishments is short-sighted, IMO. The guy has done some incredible things for CU.
 
If we were to lose Bohn right now we would be in a world of hurt. The only saving grace is if we lose him he has made so many improvements that the CU AD job might actually be viewed as a good job again and could maybe attract some decent candidates.
 
Let's face it--- if Bohn had hired Petersen, the OC from Boise State--- everyone would have probably fired him before we even got the chance to see what Petersen could do. To jump a HC from Boise to CU was seen as a big step up, even more so than a OC from a school like Florida or Texas. So I understand that with the disarray that CU was in that we did not have great choices. It is easy to say that CU was still a great gig as we love CU, but I don't think that that was the perception after the scandal aftermath. And yet, I see better things in the Cu althetic department. Which makes it a much more attractive propasition than it was 5 years ago. So in a way, by getting the budget increased, better facilities, he is making it so that CU is a better coaching choice is Dan fails again this year. He is doing all he can.
 
I agree with Sackman and Buffnik and think Mike is doing a great job for all the reasons they have listed. He has been making lemonade out of the lemons in the athletic dept all the while balancing the books and getting us in the conference we should have been in 16 years ago. He has gotten us a practice bubble, locker room improvements, new bball practice facility and has increased the fundraising all while having a fraction of what other programs have to work with. The best three things Mike can do for us as an AD is increase the fundraising, grow the CU brand and upgrade the facilities. He has been doing all of these things. -- You do these things and the HC jobs for bball, football etc become more and more attractive. I hope he stays a long time at CU and I hope he knows that a lot of CU fans appreciate the job he has given. -- CU gets a good FB coach and we are set. Don't worry the darkest days are behind us. CU is going to rise up again sooner than later and Mike Bohn should share in some of the credit.
 
Ok, you guys have convinced me of Bohn's merits. As someone said, when football sucks, everything sucks. It is hard to see the forest for the trees when both football and basketball are cellar dwellers. But, much of that is out of MB's hands. Here's to hoping that we turn it around of the field/court really soon.
 
Bohn has missed on only one hire as far as I'm concerned and Hawk is still here with the chance, albeit slim, to become a good hire. KMM I don't consider a bad hire because I personally don't give a s**t about girl basketball. Bzdelik was a good hire IMO and I don't blame Bohn for Buzz bolting for Wake Forest. Boyle hasn't coached a game yet, but I like him so far. Fans too often judge an AD's job performance on the football team's record and that is a shame IMO. Bohn is a very good AD and if he left, it would be bad for CU make no mistake.
 
Bohn has done a lot of good things at CU - especially the Pac 10 move which he played a large role in, but I remain skeptical of him based on the following items:

1. Hawkins - I do not blame him for the initial hire, which we all loved, but the extension. Allowing Hawkins to get such a huge buyout really hamstrung Bohn when he finally decided he wanted to fire Hawkins last winter.

2. Signing on for 10 years at Invesco - Bohn gave away the farm on that deal. Why he didn't get a few games in Folsom (at a minimum) I'll never know.

Basically, I don't think he's a very good negotiator, which is important.
 
2. Signing on for 10 years at Invesco - Bohn gave away the farm on that deal. Why he didn't get a few games in Folsom (at a minimum) I'll never know.

I really hope we have some type of grounds to get out of this contract. With only 3 non-conference games on the schedule in the new PAC I don't want to waste one on Little Brother.
 
I really hope we have some type of grounds to get out of this contract. With only 3 non-conference games on the schedule in the new PAC I don't want to waste one on Little Brother.

Agreed. There better be an out in there for changing conferences, or that will be one more strike against Bohn.
 
It would be nice to know some more about the financial incentive of the game in Invesco.

There must be some significant financial reason for the Buffs to agree to that length of contract.
 
Agreed. There better be an out in there for changing conferences, or that will be one more strike against Bohn.

A.) should he be clairvoyant? that deal was signed a half year before anyone has indicated that the move even looked possible.
B.) we bank significantly more playing the game at invesco than we do Folsom.
C.) It gives us the chance to 7 "home" games.
 
A.) should he be clairvoyant? that deal was signed a half year before anyone has indicated that the move even looked possible.
B.) we bank significantly more playing the game at invesco than we do Folsom.
C.) It gives us the chance to 7 "home" games.


Re: your "B" statement - I have heard that from lots of people - but never any real information to back it up. Frankly, I have a hard time believing it. Game in Folsom = 100% revenue to CU, less payout to CSU. All parking, concessions, etc. = 100% CU. Not to mention the benefit to the City of Boulder.

I do agree with your "C" position though - in that it was part of THIS SEASON'S season ticket package, when it was in fact a CU road game.
 
Re: your "B" statement - I have heard that from lots of people - but never any real information to back it up. Frankly, I have a hard time believing it. Game in Folsom = 100% revenue to CU, less payout to CSU. All parking, concessions, etc. = 100% CU. Not to mention the benefit to the City of Boulder.

I do agree with your "C" position though - in that it was part of THIS SEASON'S season ticket package, when it was in fact a CU road game.

I believe it is a slight loss in "home" years but a huge financial gain in "away" years. Plus it is supposed to make the state government and the Denver area alums happy while getting in-state prospects more interested in the game.
 
A.) should he be clairvoyant? that deal was signed a half year before anyone has indicated that the move even looked possible.
B.) we bank significantly more playing the game at invesco than we do Folsom.
C.) It gives us the chance to 7 "home" games.

A. That is standard language in most OOC contracts. Conference changes often necessitate revisiting prior scheduling. Therefore, it better be in there.
B. The economics change quite a bit when the game is as sparsely attended as last week. Does anyone have final ticket sale numbers?
C. Who cares? I'd rather drive to Ft. Fun that go to that ****hole again. I hate playing the game at that stadium with all my being.
 
A. That is standard language in most OOC contracts.

You read a lot of OOC contracts, do you?

:lol:

I know that the game at Invesco makes the AD a lot of money purely because it adds a seventh game to the season ticket package. That's going to be hard to give up. I'm with you, though, the experience at Invesco sucks eggs. I can't stand that place. I used to tolerate it, now, not so much.
 
Bohn was on with Alfred Williams, D-Mac and Schlereth one of the days this week. They really grilled him hard about how that game should be moved back to Boulder. Bohn was ever the diplomat, but his tone seemed to suggest he wasn't married to the game in its current format.
 
Being only able to watch the game on the Dactyl Cam, and listening to the KOA feed - it certainly SOUNDED like it was a heavy CU crowd. If CSU continues to struggle under Fairchild (or the next coach, whoever that might be) I would think the sponsors would be putting some heavy grief on the two schools re: the financials.

How many sponsors has that game had, already? Qwest? Now "Cinch Jeans"? What will it be next year?
 
I have seen my last game at the Invesco Diaphragm. I just do not like the stadium, atmosphere or location.
 
Back
Top